Budget 2015: George Brandis' extraordinary raid of the Australia Council

With a tiger's pounce that blindsided everyone, George Brandis has moved ruthlessly to carve out his own arts fiefdom. But in doing so, he has taken on an industry with a loud voice, writes Ben Eltham.

"Wow. Extraordinary."

"Oh no. He's done it again."

They were just two of the reactions from gobsmacked arts leaders I spoke to last night.

What would the new program do? How would funding decisions be assessed? What would its priorities be?

Could the Arts Minister really be creating his own arts fund, to distribute as he pleased? And could he be using the Australia Council's money to do it?

Yes, he could. In a tiger's pounce that blindsided everyone, Brandis has moved ruthlessly to carve out his own arts fiefdom. It's a power move designed to seize control of cultural policy from the arms-length advisory body that has been doing the job for the past four decades, and place it firmly in the hands of its political master.

Brandis also advanced a series of veiled criticisms of the Australia Council, both illogical and factually incorrect:

Arts funding has until now been limited almost exclusively to projects favoured by the Australia Council. The National Programme for Excellence in the Arts will make funding available to a wider range of arts companies and arts practitioners, while at the same time respecting the preferences and tastes of Australia's audiences.

As Ben Neutze writes in Crikey today, "That first sentence certainly has some bizarre logic - that arts funding has been limited to the projects favoured by the independent, expert body established to distribute arts funding."

It's not even true that arts funding has been "limited almost exclusively" to the things that the Australia Council likes. The Federal Government spends $100 million a year on screen culture through Screen Australia. It funds two national art galleries, two museums, a national library, a war memorial, a film and sound archive, and a media school. Together, those bodies get more funding than the Australia Council itself.

Even within the Australia Council's ambit, the majority of the agency's funding is not given to "projects favoured by the Australia Council", but is in fact quarantined away from project funding. In 2013-14, the Australia Council gave $102 million of its $199 million grant budget to the 29 major performing arts organisations. That money, the majority of the Council's funding, is not available to projects.

Brandis would have to know this, as he stated in his media release that the major performing arts organisations would be protected from the funding cuts he announced. That means the austerity will squarely be on the most vulnerable part of the sector: the smaller companies funded by the Council, and individual artists themselves.

Perhaps the Attorney-General and Arts Minister has learned a thing of two from the spooks he presides over, because the decision was made in utmost secrecy. It surprised the entire sector.

There was no consultation. Tony Grybowski and Rupert Myer, the Australia Council's CEO and chair respectively, were told only shortly before Joe Hockey delivered his budget speech - reportedly at 5pm. Grybowski was holidaying in London. He cut his vacation short to jump on the first plane home. Key staff inside the Australia Council are devastated.

The raid on the Australia Council comes at a difficult time for the agency. It was already digesting stinging funding cuts in last year's horror budget. The agency is also working through a brand new funding protocol, in which small-to-medium organisations will be given six-year funding agreements. The six-year grants now seem doomed, even before they have been applied for.

Australia's long-held and bipartisan philosophy of arms-length cultural funding is now in jeopardy. Whether he's fighting the culture wars or just seeking a very personal legacy in the portfolio, Brandis appears to have put paid to the idea that the people deciding on arts funding should be artists themselves. As the National Association for the Visual Arts' Tamara Winikoff said last night, "When in the past there have been examples of ministers funding pet projects, they've been very hard to justify."

George Brandis is one of Australian history's most intriguing arts ministers. Under John Howard, the position was usually reserved for junior ministers with little political clout; the now-forgotten Peter McGauran was a typical example.

Brandis is different: as Attorney-General, he is a senior cabinet minister with responsibility for some of the Government's most sensitive policy areas, including national security and counter-terrorism. But he also seems to treasure the cultural prestige that the role of Arts Minister gives him.

With this move, however, Brandis may have miscalculated. Arts is a small portfolio, but its visibility and cultural impact give the industry a loud voice. Brandis has already been booed at more than one arts event in recent months. The Arts Minister may find himself hounded by the very audiences he says he respects.

harvey:

Every good dictatorship takes control of the arts arena. Music, painting, theatre is then put to use in the glory of the fatherland or motherland.

So if I had to bet on who will be non funded, my list would be:

Plays sympathetic to asylum seekers and critical of camps. Plays sympathetic to Aboriginal homelands. Plays about the working poor. Plays about the wealthy rorting the tax system. Or the super system. Or the negative gearing system. Satire about the Abbott / Hockey /Brandis govt.A rerun of 1984 or Animal Farm. Anything that takes a laser light to the increasingly draconian security laws.

Music about any of the above. Or art. Or novels. Or poetry.

But what might he fund ? Arts about the glorious mateship of Australia in times of war and peace. Opera. And ?

Peter:

13 May 2015 8:59:59pm

If people want to make plays or write books about asylum seekers, negative gearing and what not, there is nothing to stop them doing so. All they need is a pad of paper and a pen. Not sure why we need to fund it with public cabbage.

Bree:

Peter:

15 May 2015 9:06:46am

Yes indeed. Those publicly-funded plays about the plight of asylum seekers really attract high numbers. Vast numbers of people being educated about issues of the day by government-funded theatre - that's a thing.

john Bartlett:

muzz:

14 May 2015 4:21:24am

You are right the USSR, Nazi Germany and PRC and lots of other right wing dictatorships funded the arts apart from art that was considered degenerate . Degenerate art was any art that the rulers didn't like ,criticized or was controversial. Before anybody says the USSR and PRC aren't right wing dictatorship they are because all dictatorships are right wing by nature whatever political view they say they espouse.

So now we can expect only bland art to be funded by Brandis nothing controversial after all we don't want the sheeple thinking do we.

John51:

14 May 2015 11:34:28am

Muzz, you are right there. The Soviet and Chinese let alone the North Korean dictators were never for the so called workers. They were very much about controlling them right down to the n't degree. If they didn't stay controlled they were sent off their prisons/concentration camps where if they were lucky they might survive to be released at some later date. If they were lucky. Many weren't.

Left wing communism for the worker. That was always one big lie as it still is especially under Russia's latest dictator Putin where it is all about becoming rich, holding power and looking after those at the top who support him.

spud:

14 May 2015 5:13:40pm

My goodness muzz, all dictatorships, including those of the former USSR and the PRC are right wing. I guess you learned that as a patron of the sorts of arts funded by the AC, or did you come to that conclusion in a vacuum all by yourself?

blueoystercult:

John Coochey:

14 May 2015 7:19:43am

Why should these or any other arts receive public funding at all? People can vote with their feat and their wallets by attending and paying for those services that they want. This was lampooned in "Yes Minister" where uneconomic activities such as the opera and ballet get taxpayer support and others do not. If you provide a service the public will beat a path to your door.

harvey:

Nah very naive JC. Who will be producing these " services" if they have to starve themselves and their family to do it ?

Anyone who has a grant to write a play is streets ahead of the person who can only find time to write after:

Cutting the school lunches, getting the kids up, giving them breakfast, getting them ready and signing school notes, driving the kids to school, driving to work, working till 5, picking the kids up from After School Care, doing the shopping, driving home, cooking dinner, washing up, doing homework with the kids, getting them off to bed then doing the washing and tidying and ironing ready for next morning.

John Coochey:

spacey 101:

14 May 2015 1:28:35pm

Where did anybody say that JC? To get funding you have to apply for it. Its like a job interview. If you're not a very good artist you're not going to get funded. If you're a good artist but this particular submission is sub standard you're not going to get funded... since when does all art, or artist, anywhere, get automatic funding? Answer: They dont.

John Coochey:

14 May 2015 3:18:34pm

Au contrair Spacey, good artists produce goods and services that people want and get paid and if they produce enough of a good quality they become rich. It is called capitalism. If they do not they go bust and become streetsweepers or ABC journalists.

gus:

Meals:

14 May 2015 11:27:54pm

Under your logic there would be no ABC right?

I would challenge you to name one Australian artist who has become successful without any funding throughout their career...

I work in the theatre and unfortunately if you want to get good at something you have to practice. A lot of people do self fund shows at the start of their career (with money they earn sweeping streets or making coffees). Actors and designers work for profit share. And even if the show sells out the nature of the theatre in small venues mean there is only a limited amount of income you can earn - and after its shared between everyone you often only get a few hundred dollars for 7 weeks full time work. And everyone does - because they love it and they want to create culture and entertainment for Australian audiences. Maybe capitalism doesn't seem to work in the arts because the ultimate goal of the artists isn't to make heaps of money. Otherwise they wouldn't be in the arts... However - the arts do contribute massively to the economy

Losimpson:

John51:

14 May 2015 11:23:50am

Eric, I am wondering if we are going to see pictures and statues of Brandis in and around Parliament House, or even worse if that is possible of Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey. We could see the whole thoroughfare on the way into Parliament House lined with statues of all the liberal heroes including of course Abbott, Hockey and Brandis up there in their power and glory for all to nod or even bow to as they go pass.

Who know, maybe Brandis is thinking of doing what they do in the United States where ex-Presidents build Museums and Art Galleries in their name except he would't wait until he has became and ex-politician.

I wonder if they are on his list of what to do instead with the Arts grant. You do have to wonder if he really thinks he will get away with taking over the Arts grant in this way from what is and should be an independent Arts Council. It does make you wonder if those in the LNP can't see past their own megalomania of their own self importance.

Alpo:

13 May 2015 6:30:06pm

So, I guess that artists should not be involved in allocating grants for the arts.... in the same way as scientists should not be involved in allocating funds for scientific research projects... and so on?Leave that to Brandis? and Pyne? or whatever other ignorant right-wing pollie happens to be around?

LF:

"Tell us why the arts should be special? What other field of human endeavour is so entitled that someone could write in such horror of the minister "using the Australia Council's money"?"

Replace Australia Council with independent, expert body established to distribute funding and I think you've find that there'd be lots of fields. There's usually good reason to go with the independent expert body if there's been one set up in the field of endeavour.

Generally though it's thought that the minister is neither independent(being political), expert(being a politician) or very good at distributing funding(see also politician).

GreyBags:

Zing:

14 May 2015 5:34:21pm

The sports industry has the following benefits:

-It generates a lot of economic activity;-It takes money from the people stupid enough to bet and gives it to corporations who'll use the money more wisely; and-It ensures that the people most likely to disrupt our society spend their time watching television instead.

BB:

Andrew C:

13 May 2015 7:14:07pm

I have often wondered about the money spent on Australians who then turn around and claim that no money should be spent on anyone else.

I mean, if I was that sort of person, I would have received a free tertiary education from the government, but then complain that my taxes are going towards paying for other peoples tertiary education.

If I was that sort of person I would have grown up with the cultural capital, the cultural richness that the government expenditure provided, but then turn around and complain that the government is wasting money on the sorts of things i don't like.

If I was that sort of person, I probably also wouldn't realise that funding the arts is one of the major drivers of tourism in this country (probably the largest after our environment), which is a major contributor to our economy and thus the wealth that I have.

I probably also wouldn't realise that paying for politically biased, or "me friendly" art will clearly lead to inferior art and culture, in the same way funding science that is politically convenient for me will lead to inferior scientific research and a less efficient, less productive distribution of funds, damaging our economy accordingly.

reaver:

14 May 2015 8:51:15am

Unless they received their tertiary education before 1989 then they did not receive a free tertiary education, Andrew. The HECS/HELP system is a loan. Claiming that it is free is like claiming that the bank gave you free money so you could buy a home.

We, the taxpayers, already are paying for "me friendly" art through organisations like the Arts Council. The only thing that will change is the "me" involved, changing from the left leanings of the Arts Council to the right leanings of Brandis.

Now he's all anti government funds for universities. No offer to pay back what he got for free, and not even a hint of shame. A young hockey is even caught on film fighting for the government funding of universities.

LNP wives 'double dipping' maternity leave just last year is merely the latest example

Alpo:

Bev:

13 May 2015 10:51:52pm

" to projects favoured by the Australia Council"

What do they favour? Only those of the left or those who do art highly critical of the government. You can pick the formula for the plot of a book most likely to win a prize because it must contain certain themes and characters.

stephen jones:

13 May 2015 6:47:04pm

Arts money should go almost exclusively to suburban/community organizations and groups who have a record of passing on their talent to professional schools or who are in direct and responsible communication with University Arts Faculties - UWA excepted, of course.

There is still too much money going to individuals who bluff their way to success, and there is hardly a public servant who gives out such stuff and who knows what's good, and what's not.

It is still important that monies be spread out ; of course, touring companies will need help - but I remember local circus troupes and acrobats wanting some financial assistance to develop younger talent ; if I had any, I'd have given them doe myself.

I fear, though, that this Liberal government will insist on high art and ignore smaller and humbler arts ; the suburban roundabout can only spin our heads so much.

Lehan Ramsay:

13 May 2015 6:52:46pm

I don't think he's talking about the Arts, is he talking about the Arts? I thought he was talking about audiences. There is, for example, an audience for The Sydney Biennale, and would changing thee art change that audience?

jonmarks:

14 May 2015 11:55:33am

I believe Brandis is quite properly concerned with returning some of the very generous arts funding back to the control of a sober and conservative critic.More funding for proper music with a melody you can remember and hum along to and paintings that tell a story. Opera with intermissions for champers and lots of gratis seats for VIPs and plays with plots.And none of that cognoscenti lauded modern 'art' that normal, sensible people don't really understand or like very much, thank you.

Tiamaria:

13 May 2015 6:53:03pm

I am concerned that this change to the administration of Arts funding from the Australia Council to Canberra could lead to claims of corruption. I have supported the coalition for all my 50 years voting life and am most concerned. I consider the way it is currently managed under the Australia Council seems a fair way to support the wider and emerging arts community. We were told it would be a fair budget. This reappropriation of funding to a new fund for the Attorney General to choose who receives it seems it will be subject to his personal favouritism and is most questionable. The Australia Council is a Statutory body and it is hard to understand the reasoning for reappropriation of such a large amount to the Attorney General for his own personal favourites. I consider the Arts Ministers role should be specific to another minister with Arts as his/her specific role. The Attorney General should concentrate on more legal matters. Surely he has enough to do without wanting to choose who receives Arts grants!

Art and Arts:

I hope the pioneering artist Brandis get the strength to remove Art from all the news media as being classified as "Entertainment".The rest of the Arts I don't care about!

Alternatively he could appoint a number of separate Minister's to take care of all the rest, also called "Art".

Musicians are musicians, Composers are composers, Dancers are dancers, Comedians are comedians, Singers are singers, Actors are actors, Filmmakers are film makers, etc etc - you know what I mean! Moral sense: Neither of them are Artist.

Real Art is more than Science, as well as a real Artist is an inventor.Unless they don't make simple "wall art commodities" For Sale "inhibited" in Art Galleries and Museums where the corrupted curators and Directors playing The Artist, now days.All the same kinda corruption take place in all other "Art Council" bad constructions.

It is a monumental task for Brandis to clean up the Art of Australia.Give em a go and see what he can create and renew without the "inbred" staff who have dominated our backward culture for long long time.

Art and Entertainment is really two very different things.Arts and Entertainment is almost the same, candy or/and cultural poverty for the people.

Art and Arts:

14 May 2015 1:57:30pm

Sardines in oil on canvas:

I'm happy to "clean up" Brandis after all the dirt he has to go through after replacing all the decadent old academic art educators, and all the "cute" art lovers perpetuating "family" art games anno dazumal; making "was art" in the 21th century.It's a rotten and stinking "art industry". What a term!!!It is like "Sex workers" or "Sex industry".It is all a bloody mad Money Cult.43 Regional Art Galleries function is only meeting places for wine drinkers and volunteers and one fat salary for a director.It is all like a "child care" for adults or a woman shelter.Stop cheating a young generation with a false "education" about "art" by presenting wall stuff (was art).

Not to mention The Big Museums and the Big Art maniacs mafia gangland!... and the ugly collectors - $160 millions for a Pablo

Who are the very real artists in this dirty business. We all know.You don't need to be left or right or anything else on a political scale to see this insanity.

spacey 101:

Art and Arts:

14 May 2015 3:22:01pm

Thank you for your question, spacey 101!

No. actually I did formally withdraw my grant application 2 days before a decision was made as I discovered that the whole jury was "all British" racial.Next day I was informed that I got a grant anyhow.

So I received a 5 figure $ development art grant as I looked at being a "bribe" rather to keep my mouth shut.

You know what I would say, if I was interviewed on ABC 24 flagship?I would say: "Thanks me for having me". (or you)I would also ask for a retainer fee of $5.000 to speak with them, and $30.000 per minute.The $5.000 retainer fee I would handover to my barrister before the interview would take place.

dlb:

The Arts are not complying with official policy of "every thing is wonderful, everything is beautiful".

Sometimes the arts actually claim that something are not perfect in our Utopia, and for that they need to be brought back into line, Everything is Wonderful, Everything is Beautiful.

Once the Arts realise that this government is perfect and that alternate opinion leads to disaster then perhaps those in the arts will be allowed to create some works that raise the populace - remember EVERYTHING IS WONDERFUL.!

VacillatingAmbivalence:

13 May 2015 9:11:28pm

Having been an amateur artist all my life I have observed the workings of the artistic community from the edge. The simple fact is there are an awful lot of people who have more artistic talent than those who get the arts community 'on side' and become 'professional'. If Brandis wants to appropriate some funds then I suggest it be directed to the local govt area for funding local community projects supported by non professional artists.

dpete:

13 May 2015 11:00:44pm

Be prepared for a gripping TV mini-series about the ascent of Tony Abbott; plus a bit of book burning, especially "100 Greatest Tyrants" by Andrew Langley. Brandis tried to have this book banned from a Queensland school library because it included Menzies in the list of tyrants.

dpete:

14 May 2015 11:20:53pm

I think Peter Beattie's comment about wraps it up: 'George has always been a bit of a drama queen about these things.'PS: I don't know where you get the idea that the book was funded by 'the state', but I can tell you that Australian taxpayers fund masses of written crap every year -- politicians call it 'policy'.

Dove:

15 May 2015 11:11:22am

The book doesn't rank the tyrants so we've no idea whether Ming came in at #1 or #100. Given it includes Joe Macarthy and J.Edgar the author might have been better served compiling a top 100 list of tyrants of western, English speaking, liberal democracies, in which case Menzies would easily be on the list. Along with Chifley, Mannix and Doug Anthony.

But perhaps the whole attempt is a joke way of trying to teach young Australians to be critical readers and to not believe everything they read in print

Dove:

14 May 2015 10:44:40am

I see your plan but I suspect all we'd get as a society, the only art that would poke through would be in advertising. If didn't sell a product, it's on the street corner.

The government has taken the role of renaissance patron. It's relatively small beans, a lot that's funded will be junk, elitist and nepotistic. But every know and again, Australia leads the world in an artistic endevour and we contribute to the global culture. Seems like a flawed but ok plan to me

spacey 101:

14 May 2015 2:00:26pm

Well then zing, I think you need to go back and read some history. The majority of artists were in fact sponsored by government, kings or queens, or bodies set up by them. As an example pretty much all we know regarding the Celtic empire we have come to know by their art, all of it commissioned by the kings, queens and warrior chiefs, ie the ruling class.Look back at ancient Chinese art, persian art, Egyptian art, the list goes on and on, all funded by patronage from the ruling/governing elite.

Dove:

14 May 2015 2:40:17pm

Fair enough, zing, but not all art is on canvas. I am deeply conservative when it comes to giving pubic money to any form of artistic expression. My conservatism springs from a fear of creating state approved art. Currently we have subsidised 19th century European opera but not money for Australian pub bands. I balance that reluctance to play impresario with what I see as a need to fund some activities that would otherwise never take place.

It's easy to put a cost on arts funding because we measure it in dollars. But we don't measure the ROI on a kindergarten class, a casualty ward or a new submarine, Australian or Japanese. We measure them more by opportunity cost- what would happen if we didn't. No-one would like to sweep the streets of the buskers more than I or cut funding to mimed Shakespeare. But as will deal with false dichotomies on The Drum, I'd rather err on the side of the arts than have the only art that I see be in a billboard or on the side of a baked beans tin

Noel:

14 May 2015 5:55:20am

The seeds of need are not seeds of greed sown by politicians and the greedy support votes of non participating artists.Trees are the most reliable art form if it does not come from the seed it must be grafted or some other GM source which some say is most scary with the artistic scientists unnatural approach to needs and greens.Noel.

spacey 101:

14 May 2015 2:04:25pm

But if your work was really good jamieg (and Im not saying it isnt), wouldnt you love to receive a grant that would enable to you show a piece of your work that you are absolutely passionate about and proud of to the largest possible audience?As an artist myself I know that one of the greatest joys is to have my performance appreciated by the largest possible audience who can enjoy the thrill with me. Very few artists deliberately set out to create something for the smallest possible audience possible of none. Why on earth would you be against the very body who can make this happen for someone somewhere even if it isnt you?

Ravensclaw:

14 May 2015 7:32:32am

The Australian Council is a far left political organisation that occasionally dabbles in creative activities. Ben Eltham is also of the hard and intolerant left.

The Australian Council has shot themselves in their collective feet, and have no one to blame but themselves. This is Australian tax money and while the far left have complete contempt for this beyond their sense of entitlement. The Australian public have greater expectations how this money is spent.

It should be noted that the Art community is not losing funding. We can now have faith that arts spending will be applied more to ideas and creativity than it is to political allegiances. And that is a good thing.

GreyBags:

14 May 2015 3:32:36pm

Most of the people in the 'arts', particularly theatre, have made a point at understanding humanity by looking at all side of it. You have to be able to 'walk a mile in another man's shoes' to be able to portray them properly.

Right wingers are entirely one dimensional. They reject what they don't understand. They refuse to even to consider looking at a problem from a different perspective.

The arts should make people think harder, not make them happy and patriotic like they are in some bloody commercial for Vegemite. Anything that isn't pro-establishment, whether the establishment is good or bad, is considered 'far left'. Brandis will want to take the arts into a right wing comfort zone and that will result in a shallow lifeless, colourless portrayal of a very complicated and varied society.

gus:

jamie :

14 May 2015 7:37:21am

Why do I get the feeling that Brandis could not have ushered this funding change through Cabinet without the support of Tony "Captain's Call" Abbott? These ideological warriors just can't help themselves.

gus:

jk22:

I revere 'the Arts' traditionally and have a passing acquaintance with most movements up until the mid 20th c.

Basically I deplore much of what is purported and presented as 'art' in recent times.

I am strong on history and discipline in so far as it heralds perspicacity and understanding, in a gracious and kind assessment of the human condition.

So much of modern de-regulation in all spheres, including 'the arts, has rendered lack of worth, lack of meaning, lack of understanding. It just got too 'conceptual' etecetera. Not that I don't enjoy 'playing around with ideas and perceptions' but that I don't think warrants big money spent on such - whether its held to be 'art' or even science.

However I know that both art and science, separately and together, can reveal and facilitate what is truly wonderful in and for humanity. But please let us spend money on judicious ventures only.

Auzy:

14 May 2015 8:03:19am

Very slowly, all of our tax is going to be filtered into projects that benefit the military and the liberal government. This government constantly lies, and I guess the reason for the military is when the protesting starts to get serious, they can call us all Unaustralian and continue to control us

billie:

"Very slowly, all of our tax is going" to a bunch of self centred recipients who then criticise the very government who hands them the money.

Sounds like another organisation at war with the government right now ..eh?

Shouldn't Ben Eltham be declaring his Arts industry role? I didn't see it at the end of his article but isn't he involved in the arts industry, so this is not just some objective piece, its an industry funded advertisement.

Ravensclaw:

GreyBags:

14 May 2015 3:35:14pm

Too often those hard right wingers who think they are superior claim that anything that doesn't fit into their narrow frame of mind is 'hard left'. Often this contains scientific evidence and verifiable facts that they don't like.

Lehan Ramsay:

14 May 2015 8:36:55am

There's a lot to learn, that's for sure. About Audiences, and Excellence, a Tale told by the Attorney General.

But first, in order to understand that, one has to understand ASIO. And that isn't going to be easy. They don't let just anyone in, there's a very strict set of guidelines - or let us call them guild lines, for relevance - that one must pass in order to join ASIO. How does ASIO work, or rather how did it work, before it grew extra powers. It always had a lot of special tricks I suppose, some of us would have been slightly aware of their presence in our lives, keeping us safe from the forces of evil. That's the trade that Minister Brandis brings to the table here. Also he brings the legal profession, also I understand he's a keen participant in Audience. And likely a keen consumer of Excellence.

That's all relevant of course. In the world were the flapping of a butterfly's wings can take us from a tense childcare debate to almost anything, that's all relevant.

frankw:

14 May 2015 8:41:09am

Two factual points - most State arts bureaucracies in Australia (if not all) run peer assessment from within government i.e. not at 'arms-length' with minimal political interference and have done so successfully for decades. Secondly, majors core funding which is as the author says "$102 million of the $199 million Australia Council's grant budget" is not peer assessed by their own admission.

Walter:

14 May 2015 8:41:13am

"How would funding decisions be assessed" you ask. Thats up to Brandis. What we do know is that he will not allow this funding to be a vehicle for a group of lefties benefiting another group of lefties. This has been a rort in the past.

I hope he is booed by lefty artists. I am sure he will see that as a sign that this change is on the mark.

Perhaps he might now also do the same with funding academics with special grants. Another field where the left patronise the left.

awake:

Lehan Ramsay:

14 May 2015 8:46:22am

Lawyers and Attorneys, of course, are more than capable of making people dance. Excuse the harshness of that reference there Minister Brandis and read on, please. The Arts have for a long time been indistinguishable from the Arts Industry. That is, the arms of the arts that deal with things like institutionalized history, with audience, with education and cultivation and influencing public opinion. But they are something more. Personally I would caution you against going in and trying to manipulate that something more. I think it's unwise. But of course I am but a bystander, though a reasonably astute one. And of course I am an outlander, unlike your more informed inlanders.

Lehan Ramsay:

Lehan Ramsay:

14 May 2015 8:54:45am

But Minister Brandis has a dream and we are all inside his dream. Minister Brandis has become a large creative force because he now has the tools - and the trades - with which to make his dream. But it will be a temporary event, and it will cause large damage to those it touches. And it will be largely a mirage, a kind of augmented reality. That is the problem with that one.

Mike:

14 May 2015 8:55:11am

Giving the arts ministry to an animal like Brandis was always going to end in tears. I have seen nothing to indicate that Brandis has any more cultural sensibility than an amoeba, all he's interested in is power and bending people to his will.

Lehan Ramsay:

14 May 2015 9:05:27am

It's a bit complicated. But technology gave us a new way of conceiving of things. If one has used a computer, it is possible to imagine, for example, a large building as a network, and to traverse it, in one's head, as one would a computer space. An example of a computer space is a game, but people learned to conceive of computer spaces through things like moogs. Each new invention can give us a new way of seeing, or perceiving. So the introduction of augmented reality, which was a bit lame when I saw it, also allowed people to get a sense of things that were not there.

This kind of sense is useful to people who want to control other people. If you can work with that kind of imagining, you can quite skillfully put in things which are not there simply by introducing them into wide and complicated discussions. And so people have been very keen on technology, because any time they get an advance view of something new, it allows them a kind of technical advantage of imagination.

We are very impressionable and also very affected by things that we have seen over a long period of time. So, for example, Disney builds up a kind of code for us, certain things mean something significant, and then those things can also be tweaked to seem strange, unfamiliar, and uncomfortable.

That is what the political analysts are doing, but they are not the only ones and they are not the best at it. The advantage they seem to have at present is access to more information. Well you know where they got that information from, all that they have had is now legally able to be used. But I reckon they've anyway been using it for some time.

I know I can be annoying sometimes, with my particular message "it's unhealthy". But guys? It's unhealthy and I can see no compelling reason why you should be doing what you're doing.

Righto:

It's the same old cultural war that the Conservatives want to play, but it is becoming far more dangerous then what Howard ever did.

They always want to control our perception of culture and of history, as means of pursuing their political agenda.

The mainstream media, including the ABC, is now so sucked into the political class, political spin, gotcha moments, 5 minute sound grabs and 24 hour news cycle, that the independent Arts sector is the only real source of real discussion and debate about real issues in Australia society.

Its always the first step of Government's who want to shut down pularist or independent thought to take control of arts and cultural sectors to a make sure they only sing the tune of the central cultural narrative the Government wants you to hear.

There is a clear pattern here with this government, it has imposed extraodinary levels of secrecy over any aspects of Australian soceity or governance that challenge the image is wants - asylum seekers being the most obvious case in point. And above that it is seeking to instal incredible powers of monitoring its citizens with data retention laws.

Martine:

James McDonald:

14 May 2015 10:23:11am

We know, if we have any sense of history, the seriousness of this decision to establish political control over the Arts and that we are entering the dark age of a new fascism. This measure alone should raise the alarm about freedom of expression in the nation.

But when you combine it with a raft of other Abbott regime measures, political control of the Arts conjures up an agenda to subdue the nation. This attack on artistic freedom that trashes the Australia Council's funding merit principles is accompanied by other measures that attack the concept of liberty in Australia. Brandis's control of funding must been seen in the light of other evidence for this government's authoritarianism: the concentration camps for asylum seekers, the "end of the age of entitlement ideology", the establishment of the surveillance state with data retention, the slashing of community service funding, and secret negotiations for a Trans Pacific Partnership agreement that effectively hands democratic government over to the hands of litigious corporations [let alone its effects on the Arts]

Artists with respect for the liberal arts have no option but to resist. The liberties of all of us are at stake.

JonToz:

14 May 2015 11:37:53am

Having read through the above I am stunned, but not amazed, at the ignorance, prejudice and bigotry displayed by most of the commentators on this subject. The arrogant, sport infested, red necked splendour of Australia! Naked and on show for the world to judge. Like most of the informed commentators on the latest budget, I believe I woke up on Wednesday morning in "wonderland" on the other side of the "looking glass". Brandis even looks like the caterpillar on a mushroom, and I'm sure the substance in his hookah is er.. "funny".

Harquebus:

14 May 2015 11:57:48am

The Australian Government should not be meddling in the arts or sport. Both ministries should be scrapped and the government stop funding art and sport in any way.Governments supports art for propaganda purposes and sport to distract the public from the fact that they are being robbed blind.

foolking:

14 May 2015 12:28:25pm

George is setting the scenes for a foray into the arts and we all get to sit back and watch. He is the one minister with portfolio's who can carry the neo con flag without direct public consequences for his actions. It will be interesting to see how his usual low brow tactics wash with all those affected. If and when the Coalition are unceremoniously dumped, Brandis can take a lot of the credit.Has he simply identified an area that has a high representation of Labor voters and therefore has nothing to lose?

Jon Adams:

14 May 2015 12:28:51pm

Oooh.. the arts community is getting upset because of a proposed change in the way taxpayer's hard earned money is being spent! Reading some of the comments, you'd think the Australia Council was beyond question. As artists we should embrace change and if there's a different approach required in the distribution of arts money - then let's see what it is before we leap to condemn. Instead of enquiring minds, we have a torrent of fear mongering and bizarre claims about totaliitarian regimes and secret slush funds. The Australia Council is not above reproach and yep, some of the people on the board are just as reactionary and narrow-minded as those alarmists commenting on this thread. The whole way the arts are funded in this country needs to be addressed; not only at a State level but also at the Federal level. A Centre for Excellence that has separate priorities and a different charter may well be a good thing. Having spent 4 years working for Arts Queensland I can tell you most of the money is distributed by career bureaucrats rather than practising artists - depsite the 'peer review' process which often means little more than token input. From my experience great form-fillers get funded long before great artists.

foolking:

14 May 2015 2:54:40pm

Jon Adams: good comment Jon, I find the way George Brandis operates combative and questionable but I only have a perspective seen through the media. I probably should have reserved my comment until outcomes could be scrutinised. Corruption has no boundaries.

jack44:

Trooper:

14 May 2015 1:30:49pm

I first decided funding the arts was a mistake the day I saw a story on some peanut that was given $20k grant to develop his "street performance art" which ended up being him lying on a footpath vomiting milk. Colour me uncultured but I really would have preferred to see that money go to a hospital, cancer research, education, CSIRO, pretty much anywhere that that.

Lehan Ramsay:

14 May 2015 2:07:44pm

There is a heap of research out there Trooper. A heap, in fact heaps of heaps. Research that was done on humans before it became illegal or unseemly to experiment on humans. It's just sitting there, waiting for a change in our feelings about what it is to be human and what kinds of humans can be totally treated as animals. It is not necessary for them to do much more in that field I reckon. Totally targetted. I say let the young people continue with their art practices because there are much, much more pressing problems to address.

gus:

gus:

14 May 2015 4:47:42pm

The great thing about sea artists is they don't say bad things about you. And the great thing about "flagship companies" is that they don't generate new content, just replay dead artists. So lets siphon off all the money to our flagships.

gus:

14 May 2015 5:04:10pm

I agree that a lot of arts money is wasted, but Brandis is making it worse not better. I propose arts money be distributed by lottery. get rid of all the assessors and let chance deliver some wonderful surprises. I think if we get a 5-10% hit rate of good work to bad we're better off than now.

spud:

14 May 2015 5:05:01pm

As a (former) consumer of arts that were part funded by the Australia Council, I strongly applaud the Minister's actions.

That is because my experience, and those of many others is that the sorts of things the Australia Council funded became less and less consumer friendly and more and more aimed at some sort of weird, self-styled cultural elite. When you pay good money to go to an event, and then serially walk out part way through in disgust, but know that it will be worse next time because the AC will still fund it and may even throw more money at it to cover losses, things are going very, very wrong.

bill powell:

Juli cole:

15 May 2015 12:08:55am

Have you forgotten George demanding law reform banning Australia from using the phrase " Occupied Gazza " his reasoning that the perpetual use of the word Occupied was a deterent to the quest for peace between Israel and Palastine. I could be wrong but if memory serves he preferred the term "populated Gaza ". Counter terrorism,Security and all this entails how does he find the time for this portfolio . Obviously asked for it and received . Like the TAPTA Hush Hush Softly Softly. Whatever strategy you take iam positive you will get lots of support.